Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 48 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Emily Lynn Aponte v. Commonwealth of Virginia.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Emily Lynn Aponte v. Commonwealth of Virginia Anchor | green | “in reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, we 'consider the facts in the light most favorable to the commonwealth, the prevailing party at trial.” | 16 |
| 2 | Najee Finique Hairston v. Commonwealth of Virginia | green | “it is the appellant's burden to show that when viewing the evidence in such a manner, the trial court committed reversible error.” | 15 |
| 3 | Kelly Daniel Bass v. Commonwealth of Virginia | green | “the principle is now well-established that, pursuant to the fifth amendment of the united states constitution, law enforcement officers must inform a suspect in a custodial interrogation of certain rights, including the right to remain silent and to have the assistance and prese…” | 8 |
| 4 | Timbers v. Commonwealth | green | “whether an objective observer would view an officer's words or actions as designed to elicit an incriminating response.” | 5 |
| 5 | Emily Lynn Aponte v. Commonwealth of Virginia | green | “in reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, we consider the facts in the light most favorable to the commonwealth, the prevailing party at trial.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.